Talk:Edmun Dragonsbane/@comment-24524001-20140210192105/@comment-24524001-20140215223701
"I admit there is very little, but you present that as something inherently bad." No, I'm not. I did specifically mention that and I quote: "It's a matter of exposition and how it's done". And minimalistic or not, its simply wasn't done well (or at least very interesting), IMHO. What makes it so noticeable is the fact that the DD story is fairly linear and fairly small in scope (it would be unfair to compare DD to Elder Scrolls titles like Oblivion or Skyrim, but I've played Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning not long before DD and boy, for all its annoying technical limitations, does KoA have one HUGE world, decent story and NPCs for most part.) Therefore for all the fun we have fighting monsters, adjusting teams and whatnot, DD screams for a better developed story and more time spent with NPCs. "cliche is essentially just a pejorative version of archetype in this case" A cliche is a cliche, nothing else - It's an idea that is overexploited and oversimplified at the same time. It's something that goes beyond an archetype and wanders into a stereotype area and yes - there are a loooooot of stereotypical characters in DD that don't step beyond their rigid outlines. That's my major complain. "And how the hell is it a forced twist? That makes no sense. The Dragon makes an offer to each Arisen, it just so happens that Edmun took up that offer. It's not exactly deus ex, it's sensibly established. Especially considering just which entity is giving this offer. Hardly a twist, let alone forced." What are you talking about - virtually *nothing* was established prior to the dragon fight. Apart from some'' incredibly vague comments from the Dragonforged, we only know that the dragon appears, eats out heart and we're eventually going to face it and have pawns to help us with this. And what is established about Edmun? Only that he defeated the dragon and eventually became the duke and he's generally considered a good ruler. Other than that, a handful of inconsequential comments and (an easily missable) Aelinore scene what is there? I'd say that there was too little to make the story as engaging and immersive as it could be. ''"Well it's objectively minimal, whether you like it or not. I mean you're the one complaining about how minimal the exposition is, I'm just someone that appreciates minimal exposition, because I don't think anymore was necessary for this character." I'm not exactly sure of the point of this comment. My criticm that nothing interesting has been done with a very over-done type of character has been very clear from the start. However, while you (incorrectly) claim that I apparently say that the minimalistic approach is 'inherently bad', it seems that you're bent on proving that "it's minimalistic, therefore it's all good." It simply isn't. And I'm not the only one who notices that Dragons Dogma is lacking in storytelling department - it's simply a simply weaker part of DD. I still enjoy the game and eagerly await DD2, but that doesn't mean that I wouldn't like to see something better in the future. "I like that, I like not being shoehorned into a narrative like that." That's binary thinking - it appears that you think that if DD fleshed out its story and characters better it would 'shoehorn' anything. No, it would simply make things more interesting, instead of being either lackluster or confusing. There's a difference between a story that can engage its audience, make them think and fill in the blanks with their imagination - and one that on one front is fairly oversimplified and on the other leaves out so much that we can only speculate about some things. In fact, I think the game in the shape it is shoehorns us fairly strongly into how it wants us to play it or follow the story - after all, don't forget that if we don't follow the quests and some side-quests in specific ourder, we are being punished for it (the game locks out quests, some NPC interactions or even terrain, like parts of Witchwood if we don't do things in specific order). And the "minimal approach" when it comes to making more complex NPCs or interactions means that the story doesn't resonate as well as it could - and I just never really found myself caring for any of the NPCs (maybe with the exception of Barroch, who's not even part of main cast), simply because majority of them were simply boring (or annoying) stereotypes with whom I've spent very little time interacting with. Heck, I care for my pawn team more, and they're established in the game as being soulles and lacking own will - and one of them is destined to become my clone :/ And again, my 'complaining' happens because I care about the world of DD - it would make no sense for me to come here and leave loooong comments if I didn't see the potential that sits there.